My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Courthouse Square Internal Staff Team Minutes
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Courthouse Square Internal Staff Team Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:51:43 AM
Creation date
9/6/2011 11:10:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10321
Title
Courthouse Square Internal Staff Team Minutes
Company
Marion County
BLDG Date
6/5/1998
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9601 Courthouse Square Research
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
258
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
TRANSIT BOARD PRECEPTS AND GUIDELINES <br />THE COURTHOUSE SQUARE DEVELOPMENT ~ <br />February 3, 1998 <br />A number of basic questions and issues have been discussed by the District and the public <br />over the past several years as the Courthouse Square project has taken shape. The <br />following information presents fundamental questions that have been posed by the transit <br />board as it has deliberated on such issues as the transit center location and concept, <br />feasibility of joint development, project sizing and budgeting, and related issues, and <br />highlights some of the positions and guidelines that have emerged over this period. <br />• Should the District relocate its current downtown transit center? <br />Several issues drive the response to this question. First, the cusrent facility is <br />physically inadequate to accommodate the volume of today's ridership on the <br />system, and has been inadequate for the past year. Safery issues and A.D.A <br />concerns introduce serious operational shortcomings, and present disconcerting <br />and potentially costly liability issues to the District. Additionally, the District is <br />under a mandate of the City of Salem to vacate the facility. This mandate is not ~ <br />based on political whim or the vagazies of an existing council-the basis of the <br />request is an urgent and growing need for street capacity in the downtown area, a <br />-need which is only going to expand with the rapid population growth in our area. <br />The District has been successful in attracting nearly $8 million in Federal grant <br />funds to relocate a new downtown transit center. But the availabiliry of grant <br />funding, by itself, is not sufficient reason to move ahead with a new transit <br />facility. The question certainly must be asked, however, if it would be good public <br />policy, given the needs and rationale for the facility that do exist, for the District <br />to not proceed forward with a new center for the Salem/Keizer transit system in a <br />timeframe which allows the use of the grant funding. <br />There exists a solid base of reseazch and documentation dating back to the 1983 <br />"interim" development of Cherriot Station, and the District has indicated that the <br />relocation of the station to a dedicated, off-street facility remains our highest <br />priority. <br />• Dces the Board intend to change its ~~pulse" system of operation? <br />It has occasionally been suggested by lay persons in the community that going to <br />some system other than a pulse system (whereby most or all routes come together <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.